Tubal factor infertility and perinatal risk after assisted reproductive technology
- PMID: 23812461
- PMCID: PMC4292839
- DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31829006d9
Tubal factor infertility and perinatal risk after assisted reproductive technology
Abstract
Objective: To assess trends of tubal factor infertility and to evaluate risk of miscarriage and delivery of preterm or low birth weight (LBW) neonates among women with tubal factor infertility using assisted reproductive technology (ART).
Methods: We assessed trends of tubal factor infertility among all fresh and frozen, donor, and nondonor ART cycles performed annually in the United States between 2000 and 2010 (N=1,418,774) using the National ART Surveillance System. The data set was then limited to fresh, nondonor in vitro fertilization cycles resulting in pregnancy to compare perinatal outcomes for cycles associated with tubal compared with male factor infertility. We performed bivariate and multivariable analyses controlling for maternal characteristics and calculated adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Results: The percentage of ART cycles associated with tubal factor infertility diagnoses decreased from 2000 to 2010 (26.02-14.81%). Compared with male factor infertility, tubal factor portended an increased risk of miscarriage (14.0% compared with 12.7%, adjusted RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.12); risk was increased for both early and late miscarriage. Singleton neonates born to women with tubal factor infertility had an increased risk of preterm birth (15.8% compared with 11.6%, adjusted RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.20-1.34) and LBW (10.9% compared with 8.5%, adjusted RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.20-1.36). Significant increases in risk persisted for early and late preterm delivery and very low and moderately LBW delivery. A significantly elevated risk was also detected for twin, but not triplet, pregnancies.
Conclusion: Tubal factor infertility, which is decreasing in prevalence in the United States, is associated with an increased risk of miscarriage, preterm birth, and LBW delivery as compared with couples with male factor infertility using ART.
Figures
Comment in
-
Tubal factor infertility and perinatal risk after assisted reproductive technology.Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Oct;122(4):908. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a7c1f6. Obstet Gynecol. 2013. PMID: 24084559 No abstract available.
-
Tubal factor infertility and perinatal risk after assisted reproductive technology.Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Oct;122(4):908-909. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a7cc47. Obstet Gynecol. 2013. PMID: 24084560 No abstract available.
-
In reply.Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Oct;122(4):909-910. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a7cc7f. Obstet Gynecol. 2013. PMID: 24084561 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- Miller JH, Weinberg RK, Canino NL, Klein NA, Soules MR. The pattern of infertility diagnoses in women of advanced reproductive age. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181:952–7. - PubMed
-
- Andersen AN, Yue Z, Meng FJ, Petersen K. Low implantation rate after in-vitro fertilization in patients with hydrosalpinges diagnosed by ultrasonography. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:1935–8. - PubMed
-
- Camus E, Poncelet C, Goffinet F, Wainer B, Merlet F, Nisand I, et al. Pregnancy rates after in-vitro fertilization in cases of tubal infertility with and without hydrosalpinx: a meta-analysis of published comparative studies. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:1243–9. - PubMed
-
- Strandell A, Waldenstrom U, Nilsson L, Hamberger L. Hydrosalpinx reduces in-vitro fertilization/embryo transfer pregnancy rates. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:861–3. - PubMed
-
- Vandromme J, Chasse E, Lejeune B, Van Rysselberge M, Delvigne A, Leroy F. Hydrosalpinges in in-vitro fertilization: an unfavourable prognostic feature. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:576–9. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical